HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » If Guns Were As Regulated...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:52 PM

If Guns Were As Regulated As Cars



From "Being Liberal" on Facebook

http://www.facebook.com/#!/beingliberal.org

30 replies, 4283 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply If Guns Were As Regulated As Cars (Original post)
OmahaBlueDog Jul 2012 OP
pipoman Jul 2012 #1
onehandle Jul 2012 #2
pipoman Jul 2012 #4
Hoyt Jul 2012 #5
krispos42 Jul 2012 #8
Hoyt Jul 2012 #9
krispos42 Jul 2012 #11
Hoyt Jul 2012 #12
krispos42 Jul 2012 #13
Hoyt Jul 2012 #14
krispos42 Jul 2012 #15
Hoyt Jul 2012 #16
krispos42 Jul 2012 #17
Hoyt Jul 2012 #18
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #20
krispos42 Jul 2012 #22
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #24
Fredjust Jul 2012 #10
Walk away Jul 2012 #26
onehandle Jul 2012 #27
yellerpup Jul 2012 #3
hack89 Jul 2012 #6
JayhawkSD Jul 2012 #7
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #19
Glassunion Jul 2012 #21
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #23
Glassunion Jul 2012 #25
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #29
Walk away Jul 2012 #28
MIDNITERIDER1438 Jul 2012 #30

Response to OmahaBlueDog (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:58 PM

1. Except..

none of those things are required most places to simply own a car, and of coarse, right to cars are not constitutionally protected...poll tax anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:58 PM

2. Well regurgitated. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #2)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 03:03 PM

4. Yes, yes it is...

almost as often as the Chris Rock comedy bit that far too many take seriously..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #2)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 03:05 PM

5. LMAO -- This right wing inspired defense of guns crud sure gets old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 01:45 AM

8. You hate it when the right has facts on their side, don't you?

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 01:56 AM

9. What facts so you have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 08:09 AM

11. The facts in reply #1

Also the fact that all of the laws your side is screaming about now wouldn't have done a damn thing to stop the slaughter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 09:08 AM

12. If laws stop more and more guns from polluting society, we'll be much better off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #12)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:33 AM

13. We sure would be

It doesn't matter how many people are beaten, hospitalized, murders, disabled, and emotionally traumatized, just as long as it's done with muscle-wielded weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #13)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 12:52 AM

14. I bet crime goes down. You can live happily without your gun in public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #14)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:18 AM

15. I doubt it.

Any stricter gun laws imposed will by definition affect the criminals last and least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #15)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 01:52 AM

16. Krispos, you have to think long term on these things.

If your low risk now were to increase a bit, it will still be so small that if you live long enough you'll look back and say why did I waste my life obsessed with guns and fear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #16)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 02:07 AM

17. Think long term?

Okay.

I'm pretty sure that, probably in my kid's lifetime, our civilization will collapse, at which point all this crap will be moot anyway. Over population, corporatism, global warming, the rise of China and their arsenal of nukes... I often doubt the ability of our government to govern for much longer before they're a wholly-owned subsidiary of the transnational mega-corporations, who will then rape the planet into collapse and war.

I try to be positive, but it's 2am, Congress is full of corporatists, and things that NEED to be done are NOT getting done. No universal health insurance, no shift away from dead dinosaurs, no progressive income tax, no repeal of GATT or NAFTA and the like, no break up corporate monopolies, we can't admit the Senate filibuster is about as useful as an infected appendix, and Christian theocrats are trying to pry open women's legs so they can plant the Stars and Stripes in their wombs and declare them sovereign property of the US Government and Jesus. We're graduating too many lawyers and marketers and communications majors and English majors and not enough engineers and scientists and nurses.

Nobody is fighting against the creation of a wealthy American aristocracy, a class of idle rich. Nobody is arguing that a politically and economically powerful middle class is an artificial creation, and without the protection of trade and labor laws the middle class shrinks to where it was before... subservient to the wealthy and powerful, just like the poor and working class people.





Besides, other nations that have clamped down on gun ownership aren't reaping the benefits. And don't tell me "yet", either, because that's how the corporatists keep pusing Reaganomics. "It will work any day now!"

Dammit, now I'm too depressed to argue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #17)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 08:51 AM

18. I actually fear much of that too. Do you think your kids will be better off with factions fighting

each other -- when society collapses -- with the hundreds of millions of guns you left as a legacy? I don't.

Hope you feel better today. I think people will work out something to handle whatever comes along. But, I firmly believe such an optimistic outcome is more like if everyone isn't armed to the teeth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #13)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 11:59 AM

20. Facts ?

http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/

Notice that: "In 2006, firearms were used in 68 percent of murders..." So that's > 2/3 of all homicides are gun homicides. Hmm. So "guns don't kill people, people do", doesn't seem so clever now, does it ? The guns may be said to facilitate the murders. Debateble, but common sense screams that guns sure as hell have something to do with it, in a big way.

"Gun-related homicides have increased slightly each year since 2002." Hmm. Ok, this is after the assault weapons ban and the increased influence and stranglehold placed on the congress by the NRA. Can you think of some other reasons ?

Gang related gun homicides. Ok, they were most likely stolen, but where were they stolen from ? Or purchased inappropriately due to lackadaisical enforcement, if any, of current gun laws and the so-called "private sales" at gun shows which are anything but private ?

"Al Qaeda leader instructs terrorists to purchase firearms at U.S. gun shows". Hmm, wonder why ?
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-video-buy-automatic-weapons-start-shooting/story?id=13704264#.UBAWhfWQM4c|

|





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MIDNITERIDER1438 (Reply #20)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 10:33 PM

22. Facts.

Point 1: In any given year, there are about 15,000 homicides in the US. Since most incidents have a single victim, that means that every year, there are about 14,000 people that murder another.

In other words, about 14,000 murderers. Do you magically think that 9,000 of them are just going to go home and pout instead of getting something else?



Point 2: The Assault Weapons Ban expired on September 14th, 2004. That means it was at its absolute most effective on September 13th, 2004. Yet by your own source you note that they've been increasing slightly since 2002. In other words, during the last 2 years of the ban. The most effective 2 years.

Point 3: There is no gun show loophole. There are only two kinds of sales: purchases from federally licensed dealers, and purchases from private individuals. Purchases from a FFL must go through a background check, purchases from a private dealer do not (I'm talking federal law; state law may vary). Your geographic coordinates do not matter. Doubtless the guy was talking about finding a private seller at a gun show. You know, a gun show, where a bunch of people form a cluster of commerce and buy and sell stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #22)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 06:00 AM

24. At least Samurais had a code of honor, and so did Wyatt Earp (after a manner)

1. You're obfuscating the main issue. Aproximately 70% of homicides involved a firearm. We're not talking about the other 30%.

2. Who cares about the assault weapons stats, just get rid of them. We had connexes full of small arms not on the property books around the armory but the Army is about as 2nd amendment as you can get. Civilians just ended up inheriting some misguided court rulings to be able to have their own private weapons collections.

Let shooting ranges have the only premise permits for those AR-15s if it makes you so jolly to fire them for fun. If you're so lazy that you can't or won't handle a shotgun for self defense or just a simple handgun (while you should really be calling 9-1-1, not stalking around your property), I just don't feel sorry for you.

Samurai went out of style just prior to the 20th century. The overiding principle of "gun control" in our own country in the so-called "Wild West" was to deposit your firearms in town with the sherriff, or in some cases the territorial law enforcement authority. I side with Wyatt Earp in this regard, and you can be proud of that period of our history more so than the extremely selfish gun collectors of the present one who look down their noses at public safety in general that's not in their own particular style.

I never felt a "high" firing small arms since we had to clean them afterwards in the service. Of course I was artillery for awhile, so we didn't have to clean up the impact area (although we did cause brush fires occaisonally) and I wasn't a "gun bunny" anyway, plus I have no Opedius complex.

3. Apparently you never watched any of the videos of the hijinks going on at the gun show. End that foolishness, it's completely undefensible morally. The type of reasoning you all are using to defend so-called legal private gun sales which are obviously not following the law and no one is enforcing them is reprehensible, and responsible for not only the guns flowing over the border into Mexico, but even more so into the urban areas of our great country which few have chosen to even serve or defend. Hell, selling a car at auction has more rules from the DMV than gun dealers operate under in those undercover videos conducted by the NYPD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 07:18 AM

10. Don't say that.

 

The Right never, EVER has the facts on the side. Even if it were true (which it isn't), you should never concede that. The Right has NOTHING to offer, they are WRONG WRONG WRONG on every issue!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 09:24 AM

26. maybe he's a member of the "Well Regurgitated Militia "

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #26)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 09:27 AM

27. I envy their Kevlar Barf Bags. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OmahaBlueDog (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 03:01 PM

3. What perfectly reasonable requirements.

There is reason to exempt guns from health and safety laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OmahaBlueDog (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 03:53 PM

6. None of which are needed to keep a car on private property

I only need a license, insurance and inspections if I drive on public roads.

I only need a license when I carry a gun in public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OmahaBlueDog (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 12:36 AM

7. All of which is well and good

And cars still kill 30,000+ people on our highways every single year. I'm all in favor of every bit of that, but don't think for one minute that it is going to prevent Aurora. Every gun the guy owned was purchased legally, and was registered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JayhawkSD (Reply #7)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 11:36 AM

19. But that's the POINT, friend !

The weapons he was able to purchase should NOT have been able to be acquired legally. Simply put, It's 1-2-3 when you have the will to do something there is the way: 1) Reinstate the asslt weapons ban already, 2) Enforce the laws ALREADY on the books while ensuring it's done nationwide not simply as a wink and a nod, & 3) Close the loopholes such as "private gun sales" at gun shows that are anything but private. Or personally take responsibility for mass murders every year that already occur, and killing children. You're alright with that ? I'm not.
And I retired after 20 1/2 years in the Army, 6 more in the State Guard, 10 yrs in NYPD (radio dispatcher), and what, 15 more in FDNY EMS. I've seen it all, and don't want to see any more. My kids learned to handle shotguns and rifles in the Sea Cadets.
CN or CS gas. Should NOT be legal to acquire. I don't know about there, but in NY I do believe that only banks are allowed to have this in any quantity, epecially a tactical device, to protect their structure.
Special bulletproof vests. Police. No one else. Sorry. Even the biggest game doesn't shoot back. Military is organizational issue, so it doesn't belong to you anyway.
The assault rifle. Who cares how it got it's classification, it's not necessary, outlaw the damn thing.
The handguns, well, semi-auto is a category that can be debateble, but did he even take an NRA course (not that I don't even like them) ?
The 6,000 rounds. Well, idk, but there must be a way to control that, come up with something. The rest, I guess he's just a McGyver type, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there weren't some other things wrong with those purchases, like the gas containers, I mean he doesn't own a damn boat, does he ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MIDNITERIDER1438 (Reply #19)

Wed Jul 25, 2012, 03:36 PM

21. A few points.

"1) Reinstate the asslt weapons ban already" - Under the expired "ban" an individual was still able to purchase one. The "ban" was not on the possession or purchase of a so-called firearm. The "ban" was only on the manufacture.
"2) Enforce the laws ALREADY on the books while ensuring it's done nationwide not simply as a wink and a nod" - I agree.
"3) Close the loopholes such as "private gun sales" at gun shows that are anything but private." - Private party sales are not loopholes. If Person A were to sell a firearm to Person B at a gunshow or anywhere else for that matter, Person A is actually prohibited by law from conducting a background check as it is only legal to do if you are a Federally Licensed Dealer or law enforcment.

The police have not released where he purchased the CS gas so I cannot comment on it. I do however agree that it should be available for purchase. I'll go a step further and state that I do not feel the police should not be allowed to purchase it either.

Not sure what you mean by "special" bullet proof vests. No vest is bullet proof. But I cannot see why a vest should be illegal to purchase by the general public. There is a federal ban on the puchase if you are a convicted felon, but this goes back to your point about laws not being enforced. I used to own and wear a vest regularly. It has nothing to do with hunting, I just wanted to add a layer of protection when doing my job.

"The assault rifle. Who cares how it got it's classification, it's not necessary, outlaw the damn thing." - If classification mans nothing, I propose that all firearms that are pink should be classified as assult rifles and should be outlawed. All others are ok. It does matter how they get their classification otherwise you end up with a law banning BB guns like in happened in the state of New Jersey. No exageration.

6,000 rounds is a tough one. Everything is cheaper in bulk.

I own gas containers, I don't own a boat. Hell, I own 4 containers. One for the lawnmower, one for the chainsaw and two for our cars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #21)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 05:29 AM

23. nice reply, thanks, heh heh

Yes, we'll have to wait until more is known. I just don't want to be stifled to debate by cowering under the misplaced political agenda of the NRA supporters. On my blog posts you can see my viewpoints and evidence for my general stance for tightening the enforcement of our laws and if necessary replace them or modify them with better and more effective ones. It's not necessary to become anymore restrictive than outlawing the so-called "assault weapons" (as a military retiree I've always wondered about that designation) that are the most efficient killers of people.
I stand with Mayor Bloomberg on his proposals which have now shown to be the only leadership available in this morass of NRA campaign contribution blackmailing. I disagree with much other of his political business philosophy, but this is crystal clear, at least to me. That mayors' organization has a lot to be said for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MIDNITERIDER1438 (Reply #23)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 08:42 AM

25. I believe the discussion should be had

I however cannot get behind Bloomburg. His proposals if you read into them violate civil rights. Not just the 2nd. He has no respect for the 4th nor due process. I cannot get behind this repuke at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #25)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 12:15 PM

29. I know what you mean

Trust me, I feel worse about Guiliani, you can't imagine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MIDNITERIDER1438 (Reply #19)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 09:29 AM

28. Thank you for your many years of service and your excellent post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #28)

Thu Jul 26, 2012, 12:15 PM

30. You're very welcome (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread